Mixed messages Archaeology and the media

Abstract

Over the past few years in the UK, archaeology has joined gardening, cookery and home make-overs as a motherlode for popular TV programming and feature articles. From a period of shifting uncomfortably between dull, if worthy, accounts of new finds with a limited non-academic significance, and the blatant sensationalisation of evidence, there is an increasing tendency to make more of any ‘mysterious’ data particularly that involving bodies, Egyptians, cosmic links, drugs and sex. It makes for good viewing figures, but some archaeologists have expressed concern that the stories are skewing the subject. This paper offers evidence from the front-lines of both journalism and archaeology – and suggests that archaeologists should pay more attention to how they, too, tell stories.

[The grave]contained an inhumed body wearing hobnailed footwear accompanied by a small New Forest beaker placed at the neck. The body had been covered by a board of planks nailed together which rested on a ledge left towards the bottom of the grave pit.' (Cunliffe, 1991: 8)

SUNSPOT! The 1,700 year old skeleton of an womanstill wearing leather boots – has been dug up byarchaeologists on a farm at Over Wallop, Hants.' (The Sun, August 1991).